The Centauri invade modern-day Earth

[[BL]Phalanx]

Well, we know the Centauri have rapid-fire energy weapons. We can guess that the concepts of artillery and armor aren't completely foreign to them. Unfortunately, we don't know exactly what equipment they have in these areas.

I was actually hoping to draw the attention of someone who possesses the B5Wars stuff on their ground forces. It details what kind of vehicles each major power uses to fight on the ground.

We do know that their air support would be massive, though. It would be extremely difficult to move a conventional army against any Centauri ground force, since I think it's safe to assume their starships would be able to observe any troop movements, and they would just start bombarding our army from orbit. Guerilla warfare would be our only viable option.

I'm going to quote myself:

Oops, I meant for no orbital bombardment.

No orbital bombardment. This is a test of their ground capabilities. The only thing the orbitting craft might provide is data, but this isn't a test of how well their starships can pound ground targets.

We don't have any significant space-faring capability, at least not compared to a civilization capable of waging war in space and dominating planets in distant solar systems. We're only marginally better off now than the Narn might have been when the Centauri invaded them.

Oh, but the Narns probably did not even have telescopes at the time. They were probably Iron Age or Bronze Age.

Another major Centauri advantage... they've demonstrated their willingness to use weapons of mass destruction (mass drivers on Narn), so the should have no compunctions about using biological weapons against humans. They shouldn't have much trouble coming up with a human-specific biological agent, and the threat of such a weapon would be an excellent means of forcing capitulation.

Look, I already know they hold alot of the cards in this fight, but I'm not interested in hearing people say "yep, one-sided slaughter". Assume that the Centauri are interested in testing out their ground vehicles and equipment, and testing their doctrine in an environment that can be somewhat challenging. Of course the overall objective is to take Earth, but they're taking the opportunity to try out their version of GROPOS.

Now if only someone with that B5Wars stuff would frikkin show up, LOL....

[neoolong]

Another major Centauri advantage... they've demonstrated their willingness to use weapons of mass destruction (mass drivers on Narn), so the should have no compunctions about using biological weapons against humans. They shouldn't have much trouble coming up with a human-specific biological agent, and the threat of such a weapon would be an excellent means of forcing capitulation.

Uh, if that's true, why's it take the virus in A Call to Arms 5 years to match the species?

Just because it has to work by itself?

[Ted C]

Fine...

For no apparent reason, the Centauri decide to dispense with their major advantages and use conventional ground forces against us.

All we can really compare are infantry units until someone with some official material on B5 ground warfare shows up.

I think we can safely guess that Centauri PPG's are at least equivalent to EarthForce PPG's. EarthForce PPG handguns can actually blow down a bulkhead door in a few seconds if you get a few together (seen to work in "Thirdspace"), so their energy delivery is nothing to sneeze at. Effective range is unknown.

We know the possess the technology to make guided missiles as well as to make energy weapons ranging from handguns to capital ship weapons. Equipping a ground vehicle with an energy cannon should be easy enough, as well as rocket launchers which could be configured as artillery systems.

I think it goes without saying that they should have the technology to defeat our forces. They should be able to deploy weapons with greater range, firepower, and accuracy than anything we currently possess. They should be able block our existing sensor technologies with ease, while we would be unable to effectively block theirs. They should be able to dictate the times and places of battle by virtue of superior surveillance, so they won't ever give us a chance to fight them on equal terms.

As I see it, we're stuck trying to fight an asymmetric war. We have to determine what assets they want and put our military resources close enough to them (or in them) to limit the amount of firepower they can use. Disguising troops as civilians and/or using civilians as human shields is probably futile; the Centauri obviously have no compunctions about killing large numbers of civilians (just look at the surrender terms they dictated to the Narns!).

It might be worthwhile to rig demolition charges to dead-man switches among the defenders of Centauri targets; if we continually deny them the resources they're after, they may be dissuaded.

It's a pretty ugly scenario; even with just guesswork at Centauri assets, I don't see how we can expect to take them on in open battle.

[Ted C]

Uh, if that's true, why's it take the virus in A Call to Arms 5 years to match the species?

Just because it has to work by itself?

It's not an engineered virus. It's some kind of nanotech swarm that collectively studies the target population and determines how to kill them. It's more of a terror weapon than a genocide weapon.

[[BL]Phalanx]

Fine...

For no apparent reason, the Centauri decide to dispense with their major advantages and use conventional ground forces against us.

All we can really compare are infantry units until someone with some official material on B5 ground warfare shows up.

I think we can safely guess that Centauri PPG's are at least equivalent to EarthForce PPG's. EarthForce PPG handguns can actually blow down a bulkhead door in a few seconds if you get a few together (seen to work in "Thirdspace"), so their energy delivery is nothing to sneeze at. Effective range is unknown.

That might not be so impressive. Consider that they cut it down, they didn't blow it down. They only need to melt a small slit all the way around it. Also, aren't you thinking of "End Game"? Or did that also happen in "Thirdspace"?

We know the possess the technology to make guided missiles as well as to make energy weapons ranging from handguns to capital ship weapons. Equipping a ground vehicle with an energy cannon should be easy enough, as well as rocket launchers which could be configured as artillery systems.

I think it goes without saying that they should have the technology to defeat our forces. They should be able to deploy weapons with greater range, firepower, and accuracy than anything we currently possess. They should be able block our existing sensor technologies with ease, while we would be unable to effectively block theirs. They should be able to dictate the times and places of battle by virtue of superior surveillance, so they won't ever give us a chance to fight them on equal terms.

What makes you so sure their EW would so easily screw our sensors, or that our EW would be ineffective?

And are you sure they'd have superior firepower? Fighting on the ground, there's pretty much a limit to how much firepower you would want to throw around. We have some tactical nuclear weapons that could be deployed.

Superior range, perhaps, but terrain can obstruct line-of-sight and I'm not convinced our EW would be completely ineffective. Also, long-range shots would come from lower-velocity ballistics or guided weapons, as otherwise a shot will just fly over the horizon rather than arcing down on a target. Our units could probably evade such attacks if they came from unguided ballistics, and guided weapons can be spoofed.

As I see it, we're stuck trying to fight an asymmetric war. We have to determine what assets they want and put our military resources close enough to them (or in them) to limit the amount of firepower they can use. Disguising troops as civilians and/or using civilians as human shields is probably futile; the Centauri obviously have no compunctions about killing large numbers of civilians (just look at the surrender terms they dictated to the Narns!).

I don't think we would need to be completely defensive. The Centauri will need to secure a landing zone first, and then move out from there. They'll probably pick an area close to the shore so that they don't need to worry about their backs being exposed to us. Some of our nuclear missile submarines could move near shore and fire at them. Hell, our surface navies could probably keep them busy as well, with nuclear missile strikes and conventional weapons.

Also, the Centauri are going to be outnumbered. It's alot of terrain to cover with a smaller force. Their perimeter is bound to be somewhat permeable. Sneaking people through it to hit their rear is very possible, especially with the more territory the Centauri army takes and the further it is spread thin.

It might be worthwhile to rig demolition charges to dead-man switches among the defenders of Centauri targets; if we continually deny them the resources they're after, they may be dissuaded.

Or leave a nuke and set it off when they arrive.

It's a pretty ugly scenario; even with just guesswork at Centauri assets, I don't see how we can expect to take them on in open battle.

Be creative. I'm hoping some military buffs or some of the folks who have actually been in or are in the military to chime in. I don't think the level of firepower will be too disparate, since both sides are fighting on the ground they're not going to throw around anything too powerful. With the right strategy, who knows?

[kojikun]

and the pr0n will be live action tenticle monster hentai.

Who's got a tachyon transmitter and the coordinates for Cantauri Prime!?

[Darth Wong]

Fine...

For no apparent reason, the Centauri decide to dispense with their major advantages and use conventional ground forces against us.

Phalanx really should have concocted a scenario which would make this plausible, like "large modern army and equal-sized Centauri army are stuck onto a deserted planet somewhere by an omnipotent being and told to fight it out with no backup".

All we can really compare are infantry units until someone with some official material on B5 ground warfare shows up.

True.

I think we can safely guess that Centauri PPG's are at least equivalent to EarthForce PPG's. EarthForce PPG handguns can actually blow down a bulkhead door in a few seconds if you get a few together (seen to work in "Thirdspace"), so their energy delivery is nothing to sneeze at. Effective range is unknown.

I would have to see that again. PPG shots do not seem to have any effect on walls and bulkheads whenever I see them in use.

We know the possess the technology to make guided missiles as well as to make energy weapons ranging from handguns to capital ship weapons. Equipping a ground vehicle with an energy cannon should be easy enough, as well as rocket launchers which could be configured as artillery systems.

Not necessarily. We do NOT know what size of reactor they need for these weapons, and since their hand weapons tend to be of similar size to ours without a significant advantage in lethality (if any), I would be hesitant to assume they can put an extremely powerful energy weapon onto a ground vehicle.

I think it goes without saying that they should have the technology to defeat our forces. They should be able to deploy weapons with greater range, firepower, and accuracy than anything we currently possess.

Why? Suppose they've neglected their ground forces; we saw only one EA ground attack in the show, and it didn't look too impressive to me. Where was the armour? Where was the artillery? Did they even wear helmets?

They should be able block our existing sensor technologies with ease, while we would be unable to effectively block theirs. They should be able to dictate the times and places of battle by virtue of superior surveillance, so they won't ever give us a chance to fight them on equal terms.

Not everything can be easily identified from space. In a jungle environment, their eye-in-the-sky advantage would be worth precisely dick. And I don't see why our ECM should be useless while theirs isn't.

As I see it, we're stuck trying to fight an asymmetric war. We have to determine what assets they want and put our military resources close enough to them (or in them) to limit the amount of firepower they can use. Disguising troops as civilians and/or using civilians as human shields is probably futile; the Centauri obviously have no compunctions about killing large numbers of civilians (just look at the surrender terms they dictated to the Narns!).

If we assume that it's an all-out fight and WMD are not to be used, how large of a force can they realistically deploy, and with what weapons?

It's a pretty ugly scenario; even with just guesswork at Centauri assets, I don't see how we can expect to take them on in open battle.

Actually, if their forces are quite small, I don't see why it would be a problem. The real problem is concocting a scenario where any of this makes sense, since they would realistically just threaten orbital bombardment.

[[BL]Phalanx]

Phalanx really should have concocted a scenario which would make this plausible, like "large modern army and equal-sized Centauri army are stuck onto a deserted planet somewhere by an omnipotent being and told to fight it out with no backup".

But that just sounds silly. :p

It's not that implausible, IMO. Politics has interfered in military operations since ancient times.

I would have to see that again. PPG shots do not seem to have any effect on walls and bulkheads whenever I see them in use.

Well they burned through a door and dropped it by firing at the edges of the door frame. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume an air-tight seal on the door, since it was a door on a warship in space that could get its hull breached in a fight.

Not necessarily. We do NOT know what size of reactor they need for these weapons, and since their hand weapons tend to be of similar size to ours without a significant advantage in lethality (if any), I would be hesitant to assume they can put an extremely powerful energy weapon onto a ground vehicle.

Well I don't think Ted's saying they can put an extremely powerful energy weapon on a ground vehicle, just that they can put an energy weapon on a ground vehicle.

That doesn't mean very much though. We know that Earth Force still uses slug-throwers, and an energy weapon isn't going to necessarily be more powerful than a slug-thrower or a missile.

Why? Suppose they've neglected their ground forces; we saw only one EA ground attack in the show, and it didn't look too impressive to me. Where was the armour? Where was the artillery? Did they even wear helmets?

Yeah, they wore helmets. Heck, B5's security guards wear helmets and armor.

We didn't see their armor or their artillery, only their "Valkryie" gunships, but then we didn't get to see much of the battle. EA is supposed to have tanks and artillery, though again that's detailed in official material, B5Wars... but it doesn't look like there's anyone here that has that material.

Not everything can be easily identified from space. In a jungle environment, their eye-in-the-sky advantage would be worth precisely dick. And I don't see why our ECM should be useless while theirs isn't.

I don't see why our EW would be completely ineffective, either. But a jungle evironment would be a rather questionable place for the Centauri to maneuver into...

If we assume that it's an all-out fight and WMD are not to be used, how large of a force can they realistically deploy, and with what weapons?

Well I dunno about no using WMD. I just said that they wouldn't bomb us from orbit. I'm pretty sure we'd start throwing nukes at them as a routine thing, and we can expect them to answer in kind with their own tactical nukes.

Actually, if their forces are quite small, I don't see why it would be a problem. The real problem is concocting a scenario where any of this makes sense, since they would realistically just threaten orbital bombardment.

Well, yes, if all they wanted to do was win. But come on, humor me. Let's just pretend they're testing out their ground tech and doctrine.

Heck, the Minbari did it during the Earth/Minbari war. Instead of flattening colonies from orbit, they'd send down ground troops. It was a point of honor for them to finish a foe that way, and indeed in the B5 universe there seems to be an agreement among major powers that they won't simply bomb each other from orbit. When the Centauri used mass drivers on Narn, the other nations denounced the Centauri. When the Narn and Drazi bombed Centauri Prime, the others were just as shocked.

I think the reason is that, with no planetary energy shields amongst the Younger Races, and ships throwing around nuclear weaponry as a routine thing, their starships can easily devastate those on the ground, even without gaining space superiority. Just jump out of hyperspace, and lob several nukes at the planet below. Or tow a large rock through hyperspace and then release it to impact the planet below. This is probably why the major powers even bothered to develop ground forces so extensively (even the Minbari have tanks, despite their ships being so much better than all the other Younger Races' ships). As either an explicit or implicit agreement amongst the major powers, even in war-time they don't simply waste each other's planets and colonies from orbit... they send down Ground Pounders to take it on the ground. Or so that's how "civilized" nations fight in the B5 universe.

[The_Nice_Guy]

Strangely enough, that's also how most ground battles in SW and Btech were explained. Until the Vong, orbital bombardment was not used, despite the massive firepower of an ISD. What was the SW explanation for this? Too barbaric?

The Nice Guy

[[BL]Phalanx]

Strangely enough, that's also how most ground battles in SW and Btech were explained. Until the Vong, orbital bombardment was not used, despite the massive firepower of an ISD. What was the SW explanation for this? Too barbaric?

The Nice Guy

Well I think the explanation makes sense in the B5 universe. In a war, almost invariably, eventually one side will push the other back and gain control of the space above one of the other side's planets.

Now they have three options:

1.) Ignore the planet
2.) Bombard the planet
3.) Capture it largely intact with ground forces

I think that if (2) were commonplace, things would get ugly pretty fast. The B5 universe was never too stable to begin with, with wars and petty skirmishes all the time. If bombarding planets became a commonplace practice, many of the worlds would soon be devastated because war is such a frequent thing. With few enough worlds that are habitable as it is, there's really no need to render the few habitable planets into wastelands. I'd think the major powers avoid brutal orbital bombardment because if the tables were ever turned... (just look at what happened to the Centauri... they bombed the Narns and 3 years later got bombed back)

Besides, the invader probably would want the planet for themselves, so they'd want to take it intact. Bombardment would be limited and probably mainly used to take out surface-to-space weapons. After that it's the ground forces that have to actually capture the planet.

Even with that implicit/explicit arrangement, I think some B5 races still have measures against bombardment too, considering how few Narn casualties there were despite the Centauri bombardment. They probably had shelters underground or something.

[Aeolus]

Well I think the explanation makes sense in the B5 universe. In a war, almost invariably, eventually one side will push the other back and gain control of the space above one of the other side's planets.

Now they have three options:

1.) Ignore the planet
2.) Bombard the planet
3.) Capture it largely intact with ground forces

I think that if (2) were commonplace, things would get ugly pretty fast. The B5 universe was never too stable to begin with, with wars and petty skirmishes all the time. If bombarding planets became a commonplace practice, many of the worlds would soon be devastated because war is such a frequent thing. With few enough worlds that are habitable as it is, there's really no need to render the few habitable planets into wastelands. I'd think the major powers avoid brutal orbital bombardment because if the tables were ever turned... (just look at what happened to the Centauri... they bombed the Narns and 3 years later got bombed back)

Besides, the invader probably would want the planet for themselves, so they'd want to take it intact. Bombardment would be limited and probably mainly used to take out surface-to-space weapons. After that it's the ground forces that have to actually capture the planet.

Even with that implicit/explicit arrangement, I think some B5 races still have measures against bombardment too, considering how few Narn casualties there were despite the Centauri bombardment. They probably had shelters underground or something.[/quote]

I think you have some good pointshere. The B5 races cover a tiny portion of the galaxy with very few habitable worlds. Why destroy what little thier is

[Dark Primus]

With the Narns, they were able to fool the Narns because at the time the Narns had no space-faring capability and I doubt they had very advanced astronomy (beyond what they needed to plan agriculture).

I belive they did have FTL drive before they were invaded by the Centauri. For example Ragesh III was a Narn colony before Centauri invaded them according to G'kar in the first episode of the serie. [/quote]

[TrekWarsie]

If the Centauri are going attack Earth using ground troops, they'll need some atmospheric fighter support, or our fighters will go after their landing craft and shoot them down. Or, if we want to spare the fighters or we have to use them against Centauri fighters, we could use Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs) to try to take down their landers. Having half of the force blown up before it lands could cause massive problems in a planned invasion. Also, we have the homefield advantage and humans aren't above using guirella tactics against a superior, invading enemy. And we also have helicopters and attack aircraft to attack their tanks. I think that the fight would be pretty close, and with homefield advantage, Earth might actually have a slight advantage.

[[BL]Phalanx]

I think you have some good pointshere. The B5 races cover a tiny portion of the galaxy with very few habitable worlds. Why destroy what little thier is

Here's a bit more specific analysis:

http://www.chronology.org/noframes/b-fi ... onomy.html

You may or may not agree with it. Personally, I think it's reasonable.

[BlkbrryTheGreat]

Actually, there is evidence to support the idea that Centauri Hand weapons (some of them anyway) are signifigantly more powerful then Earth equivelents in B5.

When the Strike team on B5 attempted to kill the "new" kosh on B5 they POUNDED him with their PPGs and fried him with an electrical current, all of which hardly seemed to affect him. It took a fragment of original Kosh along with a piece of Lorien to actually take him out.

In sharp contrast stands the situation when Londo becomes Prime Minister and summons Morden, to have him tell the Shadows vessels to leave Centauri Prime. Two Centauri Guardsmen with rapid fire "assault rifles" (whose weapon's fire appeared to be a blue version of a earth PPG shot) entered the room and opened fire on two "cloaked" Shadows. They took EACH took out a Shadow in less then 5 seconds. Since the Shadows and Vorlons are generally considered to be equal in duribility and power, I would say that the incidents indicate that Centauri firearms are signifigantly more powerful then B5 Earth firearms.

[[BL]Phalanx]

Actually, there is evidence to support the idea that Centauri Hand weapons (some of them anyway) are signifigantly more powerful then Earth equivelents in B5.

When the Strike team on B5 attempted to kill the "new" kosh on B5 they POUNDED him with their PPGs and fried him with an electrical current, all of which hardly seemed to affect him. It took a fragment of original Kosh along with a piece of Lorien to actually take him out.

In sharp contrast stands the situation when Londo becomes Prime Minister and summons Morden, to have him tell the Shadows vessels to leave Centauri Prime. Two Centauri Guardsmen with rapid fire "assault rifles" (whose weapon's fire appeared to be a blue version of a earth PPG shot) entered the room and opened fire on two "cloaked" Shadows. They took EACH took out a Shadow in less then 5 seconds. Since the Shadows and Vorlons are generally considered to be equal in duribility and power, I would say that the incidents indicate that Centauri firearms are signifigantly more powerful then B5 Earth firearms.

Actually, I believe the Technomage Trilogy indicates that a Shadow, when it dies, emits a bright visible light. We didn't observe that effect in "Into the Fire", so they may have just phased out, wounded.

[Oberleutnant]

In ground combat Earthforce uses projectile weapons instead of PPGs, so it would be logical to assume that this applies to the Centauri as well. PPGs are badly suited for long ranges after all.

[Ted C]

I think we can safely guess that Centauri PPG's are at least equivalent to EarthForce PPG's. EarthForce PPG handguns can actually blow down a bulkhead door in a few seconds if you get a few together (seen to work in "Thirdspace"), so their energy delivery is nothing to sneeze at. Effective range is unknown.

I would have to see that again. PPG shots do not seem to have any effect on walls and bulkheads whenever I see them in use.

The incident I'm thinking about occurred in the "Thirdspace" movie; Lyta locked herself in the control room and sent repair drones to try to destroy the Vorlon artifact, and Zack a few other security guards used PPG pistols to blow open the door.

We know the possess the technology to make guided missiles as well as to make energy weapons ranging from handguns to capital ship weapons. Equipping a ground vehicle with an energy cannon should be easy enough, as well as rocket launchers which could be configured as artillery systems.

Not necessarily. We do NOT know what size of reactor they need for these weapons, and since their hand weapons tend to be of similar size to ours without a significant advantage in lethality (if any), I would be hesitant to assume they can put an extremely powerful energy weapon onto a ground vehicle.

Well, the weapons EarthForce mounts on fighters managed to blow sizable holes in the hull of a Centauri cruiser in "The Fall of Night", and I'm assuming that weapons of comparable yield (with supporting power supplies) could be placed on armored vehicles.

I think it goes without saying that they should have the technology to defeat our forces. They should be able to deploy weapons with greater range, firepower, and accuracy than anything we currently possess.

Why? Suppose they've neglected their ground forces; we saw only one EA ground attack in the show, and it didn't look too impressive to me. Where was the armour? Where was the artillery? Did they even wear helmets?

EarthForce ground troops did have helmets and flak vests in both "GROPOS" and "Severed Dreams". EarthForce security guards also have helmets and body armor. We've seen that Centauri guards wear helmets, although those look rather ornate and ceremonial.

As for vehicles, we only saw some kind of missile-armed flying craft in use in "GROPOS": I would compare it to an armed helicopter in combat role. I don't think we've actually seen a tank or artillery piece.

Since we don't really have much information about anyone's ground forces in B5, I'm making an assumption that the Centauri will intelligently use combined arms tactics. I realize that's not a given, though.

They should be able block our existing sensor technologies with ease, while we would be unable to effectively block theirs. They should be able to dictate the times and places of battle by virtue of superior surveillance, so they won't ever give us a chance to fight them on equal terms.

Not everything can be easily identified from space. In a jungle environment, their eye-in-the-sky advantage would be worth precisely dick. And I don't see why our ECM should be useless while theirs isn't.

OK, I'm again guilty of making assumptions. We know that EarthForce can detect tachyons and some other phenomena that we can't detect today, and I'm assuming that the Centauri have at least the same capabilities. I'm also assuming that they have superior computing power, and that those computers will be able get more useful information from a weaker signal than modern equipment can. Bad assumptions maybe, and I've probably overstated the advantage.

As I see it, we're stuck trying to fight an asymmetric war. We have to determine what assets they want and put our military resources close enough to them (or in them) to limit the amount of firepower they can use. Disguising troops as civilians and/or using civilians as human shields is probably futile; the Centauri obviously have no compunctions about killing large numbers of civilians (just look at the surrender terms they dictated to the Narns!).

If we assume that it's an all-out fight and WMD are not to be used, how large of a force can they realistically deploy, and with what weapons?

The Centauri only brough 12 battlecruisers to Narn, but they were planning to bomb the planet into submission, not invade. I'm not sure how many troops such a ship could carry, but a single EarthForce "Nova-class" warship carried 25,000 troops in GROPOS; the Centauri ship's capacity might be similar. If so, they could conceivably deploy hundreds of thousands of troops.

It's a pretty ugly scenario; even with just guesswork at Centauri assets, I don't see how we can expect to take them on in open battle.

Actually, if their forces are quite small, I don't see why it would be a problem. The real problem is concocting a scenario where any of this makes sense, since they would realistically just threaten orbital bombardment.

That's my opinion, but [BL]Phalanx wanted us to try to come up with some kind of opinion on a pure ground war.

[Rye]

In future for the into the fire incident, with the small arms fire killing the two shadows, would everyone mind getting it into their heads there's only one shadow there.

[kojikun]

I believe that PPGs were invented specifically for space craft fighting. They're not prone to puncturing the hull, but do cause bodilly harm. They serve no other purpose other then as a way to shoot someone without spacing the entire station or ship.

[Rye]

I believe that PPGs were invented specifically for space craft fighting. They're not prone to puncturing the hull, but do cause bodilly harm. They serve no other purpose other then as a way to shoot someone without spacing the entire station or ship.

I've heard that too. Makes perfect sense.

[Darth Wong]

I believe that PPGs were invented specifically for space craft fighting. They're not prone to puncturing the hull, but do cause bodilly harm. They serve no other purpose other then as a way to shoot someone without spacing the entire station or ship.

I've heard that too. Makes perfect sense.

If their starship hulls are flimsy enough to be holed by small-arms fire, thus necessitating the invention of a completely new type of weapon in order to remove the threat, that doesn't say much for their hulls, or for the firepower of weapons needed to punch through them.

[Sea Skimmer]

I believe that PPGs were invented specifically for space craft fighting. They're not prone to puncturing the hull, but do cause bodilly harm. They serve no other purpose other then as a way to shoot someone without spacing the entire station or ship.

There hulls must suck, 20mm of steel will provide ample protection against modern small arms unless you've got extremely expensive sabot AP rounds loaded.

[Ted C]

I believe that PPGs were invented specifically for space craft fighting. They're not prone to puncturing the hull, but do cause bodilly harm. They serve no other purpose other then as a way to shoot someone without spacing the entire station or ship.

I've heard that too. Makes perfect sense.

If their starship hulls are flimsy enough to be holed by small-arms fire, thus necessitating the invention of a completely new type of weapon in order to remove the threat, that doesn't say much for their hulls, or for the firepower of weapons needed to punch through them.

Furthermore, we've actually seen that PPG's can bring down a bulkhead door, although it takes concentrated fire from more than one. Still, it's probably more than an M-16 could do.

I suspect that PPG's behave more like high-calibur, low-velocity bullets. They do a lot of damage, but they don't penetrate especially deep and they probably have a pretty short range. They may even work like Glazer safety rounds, in that they won't penetrate even lightweight walls. They may seriously damage the wall itself, but a civilian standing on the other side would probably be safe. That might explain their popularity in a non-combatant-rich environment like B5.

[[BL]Phalanx]

Actually, I believe the reason for PPGs over slug-throwers is a concern for richocheting rounds when fighting in confined quarters surrounded by metal walls, not for puncturing the hull. IIRC, in one episode there's a concern for richocet from *PPG* bursts because of the particular construction material of the room they were in.

Consider that the computer display in "Legacies" lists 0.2c as a velocity for a Minbari cruiser, and consider what an impact with even a tiny fragment of space crap would do at those speeds.